a society question about prison time

[coolcoinz]

I saw some interviews with ex cons on youtube and they were pretty disappointed with what was waiting for them on the outside. When you're a violent offender it's really difficult to get a job. Employers are afraid of you and there's a lot of non-violent offenders waiting in line so they will always choose those.
Their prison tattoos also become a problem outside. People see their gang affiliation and don't want anything to do with them. They are ghuman trash, but don't feel like that until they're back in the society. The society actually tells it to their face and this is the tipping point for most of them. They either break and become addicts or go back to violence.

Can we change it? Yes, but the politicians prefer to act like it's fine since the house isn't falling on their heads yet. They see the cracks but prefer put some fresh paint over it hoping that it will last until they're out of office and then it will become a problem for someone else.

I actually know someone who looked healthier after being in prison.

Probably due to lack of tan (and vitamin D from the sun). They should add balconies and terraces for them to sunbathe. Imagine how the morale would rise.

Reminded me of what I read that Roman husbands are allowed to "sodomize" their wives' lovers if they were caught. They use objects like fish or radish for this. No prison time but that guy ain't showing his face in public for a long time (well there's the possibility of death from the ordeal but yeah...).

-Look it's that fish ass guy!

[1714706632]

1714706632

[1714706632]

1714706632

[1714706632]

1714706632

[1714706632]

1714706632

[styca]

The thread title is 'a society question about prison time'... and we do need to take into account the society aspect.

In the UK, mainstream political opinion is to an appallingly large extent determined by tabloid hysteria. Our 'democracy' is heavily influenced by witch-hunts, hate-campaigns, and the general stoking of the fires of prejudice. This wouldn't of course be effective if every voter took the time to think for themselves and question what they are told, but unfortunately many people just don't understand that the right to vote comes with the attendant responsibility to be well-informed.

Against this backdrop, I think the choices that a UK government can make whilst remaining in power are somewhat constrained.

There are more enlightened views in other countries, as this report on a norwegian prison demonstrates.
The UK government - whichever party was in charge - would never decide to try something like this, the fear of the inevitable tabloid outcry would prevent it. The public here at least care far less about dry stats on reduced recidivism than they do about stringing up whoever they are told is the villain of the day.

[Mometaskers]

I saw some interviews with ex cons on youtube and they were pretty disappointed with what was waiting for them on the outside. [...] The society actually tells it to their face and this is the tipping point for most of them. They either break and become addicts or go back to violence.

I actually know someone who looked healthier after being in prison.

Probably due to lack of tan (and vitamin D from the sun). They should add balconies and terraces for them to sunbathe. Imagine how the morale would rise.

Reminded me of what I read that Roman husbands are allowed to "sodomize" their wives' lovers if they were caught. They use objects like fish or radish for this. No prison time but that guy ain't showing his face in public for a long time (well there's the possibility of death from the ordeal but yeah...).

-Look it's that fish ass guy!

More like he got fatter since he's not walking around with his "friends" and he's eating on time. As for ex-cons finding it hard to find a job, I believe there are companies that are hiring ex-cons as part of their social responsibility initiative but those are far and between and can't give every ex-con a chance.

Also link me this "fish ass guy". I'm a meme normie and it might have went past my radar.

[bananacue]

There are different classifications of penalties of imprisonment. From light penalty of arresto menor to afflictive penalty of reclusion perpetua. Those penalties has three periods, the minimum, medium, and maximum. These penalties can be affected of What is the participation of the accused in the crime, if they are  accessories, accomplices, or principals. The penalties can be decrease if there are mitigating circumstances and can be increase if there are aggravating circumstances. As of today, here in our country, the penalty of death is obsolete, but the government is planning to revive such for the penalty of heinous crimes.

[coolcoinz]

More like he got fatter since he's not walking around with his "friends" and he's eating on time. As for ex-cons finding it hard to find a job, I believe there are companies that are hiring ex-cons as part of their social responsibility initiative but those are far and between and can't give every ex-con a chance.

Also link me this "fish ass guy". I'm a meme normie and it might have went past my radar.

I have to agree that prison food in many countries is better than hospital food. I saw the menu and they even had fried chicken on holidays, things like pizza day and such while people in the hospital have to eat jelly all the time

I wasn't referring to any particular meme but the way people in Rome would have reacted after seeing that sodomized lover walking with a fish sticking out of his butt.
Anyway, hope this satisfies you.
https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/a44O4ry_700bwp.webp

[Welsh]

My input was based on all the hidden factors that contribute to the costs of running a prison, and not just for water, and food costs, but for everything. I'd agree 11k is no where near that of the American prisons, but I can't possibly comment on that. Although, water charges for a prison will be much more than your regular household due to the fact that they would need regular quality assurance checks. This isn't one sample per prison. Its a sample of each length of water main over 5 meters I believe.

However, my point being is its these little things which aren't often public knowledge that we don't think of. My original point which was poorly presented I'll admit wasn't about justifying the costs, but giving a little insight into the hidden factors of running something like this with all the rules, and regulations that are put in place.

AFAIK, UK prisons actually provide very good quality of food to the prisoners. I think it was either Charles Bronson or another high profile prisoner who has publicly said that they have been treated extremely well compared to 30 years or so ago.

[franky1]

My input was based on all the hidden factors that contribute to the costs of running a prison, and not just for water, and food costs, but for everything. I'd agree 11k is no where near that of the American prisons, but I can't possibly comment on that. Although, water charges for a prison will be much more than your regular household due to the fact that they would need regular quality assurance checks. This isn't one sample per prison. Its a sample of each length of water main over 5 meters I believe.

However, my point being is its these little things which aren't often public knowledge that we don't think of. My original point which was poorly presented I'll admit wasn't about justifying the costs, but giving a little insight into the hidden factors of running something like this with all the rules, and regulations that are put in place.

AFAIK, UK prisons actually provide very good quality of food to the prisoners. I think it was either Charles Bronson or another high profile prisoner who has publicly said that they have been treated extremely well compared to 30 years or so ago.

my points was about not 11k but an acceptable assumption of $£30k.. however seeing places like america that are charging $80k is obvious sign of extreme funds wastage
yes 11k is the minimal cost for people.. and yes add in guards(£5k per inmate) and hidden costs like extra hygiene checks can bring things upto say £$30k sound reasonable. but the $80k seems very iffy to explain

anyway. even with the differential of say 11k for a nominal living in the community non convict on benefits vs a 30k prisoner.
my main topic point was is that 19k difference spending on prison a good resource for certain crimes. could that 19k difference instead go towards putting people into community projects, rehab, victim reimbursement, social services, healthcare to solve the underlying causes of the crime, to actually offer a better chance of the prisoner to not repeat their illicit acts again

[eddie13]

Prison is a huge waste of both the government's money and the inmates' time, and it probably increases the chance of inmates committing more crimes.

First of all, victimless crimes are not real crimes and should not exist.

For most crimes, the sentence should be based entirely on the premise of getting the person not to commit the crimes anymore, based on a case-by-case analysis of the person. Often, prison shouldn't be necessary at all. For example, serial shoplifters could be sentenced to a period of having to wear a bodycam whenever in public so that they could be surveiled and prevented from stealing anything. This would be a huge invasion of privacy for them, of course, but it's better than prison. Psychological treatment may be appropriate in a lot of cases. Maybe in some cases it'd be appropriate to apply some corporal punishment (eg. "100 lashes"). Having someone languish in prison for years is pretty much the worst thing for everyone, including the prisoner; I'd definitely prefer 100 excruciatingly-painful lashes than a year in prison.

The above works in a state, but it's also in-line with my anarcho-capitalist ideal. In an ancap society, prison would be a service of your protection agency, operating a bit like insurance. Typically, such prisons would have the goal of protecting you from retaliation from the people you harmed, convincing society that you are no longer a risk after you get out, and preventing you and the protection agency from bearing costs of further crimes. So typical ancap prisons would be rehabilitation-oriented, not "lock up for x years"-oriented.

I don't actually think that this would be good in any way, and I'm not advocating for it, but I've thought that it'd be rational from the US's perspective to offer inmates convicted of certain non-violent crimes the option of reducing their sentence by serving it in the military. The military is already set up as something of a brainwashing machine, and having some less-precious troops would give the military more flexibility. The US faces a problem now in that they're only ever willing to dedicate handfuls of troops to most places because they're terrified that there'll be a massacre of hundreds of troops, which would be a PR disaster. "US penal brigade wiped out" sounds bad, but it's quite a bit better than "thousands of brave US servicemen massacred."

How much more bitcoins do we need to buy an island and start a society from scratch?

[Mometaskers]

More like he got fatter since he's not walking around with his "friends" and he's eating on time. As for ex-cons finding it hard to find a job, I believe there are companies that are hiring ex-cons as part of their social responsibility initiative but those are far and between and can't give every ex-con a chance.

Also link me this "fish ass guy". I'm a meme normie and it might have went past my radar.

I have to agree that prison food in many countries is better than hospital food. I saw the menu and they even had fried chicken on holidays, things like pizza day and such while people in the hospital have to eat jelly all the time

I wasn't referring to any particular meme but the way people in Rome would have reacted after seeing that sodomized lover walking with a fish sticking out of his butt.
Anyway, hope this satisfies you.
https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/a44O4ry_700bwp.webp

Well, prison in my country sucks but in this guy's case he began eating regularly and I suppose started to have a regular sleep pattern. Can't stay up late when you are being monitored. I think that's one more reason to actually reduce the prison time, prisons get less crowded and there can be more focus on rehabilitating people in for non-violent crimes. Reduced expenses since you'd have fewer inmates.

Also, thanks for image. I would have LOLed had I been handed that receipt. 

[gmaxwell]

I don't actually think that this would be good in any way, and I'm not advocating for it, but I've thought that it'd be rational from the US's perspective to offer inmates convicted of certain non-violent crimes the option of reducing their sentence by serving it in the military. The military is already set up as something of a brainwashing machine, and having some less-precious troops would give the military more flexibility. The US faces a problem now in that they're only ever willing to dedicate handfuls of troops to most places because they're terrified that there'll be a massacre of hundreds of troops, which would be a PR disaster. "US penal brigade wiped out" sounds bad, but it's quite a bit better than "thousands of brave US servicemen massacred."

The problem you have with that is that an unacceptably high number of people who end up incarcerated ... kinda suck.  Certainly not all, and I don't mean to suggest that they deserve to be in jail because of it. But a lot of people are addicted, stupid, or just dysfunctional in various difficult or impossible to cure ways that contribute to them making the sort of bad decisions which predictably end up with them in jail.

The military doesn't want those folks: Even as cannon fodder-- if you can ignore the moral problems with ever using a human that way-- they can be more trouble than they're worth.

Already one of the serious moral problems with the military is that participation to is isn't particularly voluntary for many people:  Many people feel forced into service because their economic situation leaves them justifyably feeling they have few other options. Beyond the ethical issues of forcing people into life threatening situations, a non-voluntary participant has an even weaker position to stand up against abuses of military power. A penal participant would be far worse.

And then there is the question of incentives:  If prisoners frequently go into the military to avoid sitting in a cell that creates a powerful incentive for the state to create more prisoners.

I think it should probably be considered a human rights abuse to make any use of prisoners which doesn't benefit the prisoner (or at most their fellow prisoners) primarily such as education, therapy, or employment like activities *at market rates* where all the proceeds would go to them when they leave prison. Perhaps it would be okay for them to defray their incarceration costs up to whatever they'd be spending for housing/food outside of prison, but I think even that is sketchy. They certainly shouldn't be performing public service as a prisoner (though I think limited amounts of public service is an alternative to incarceration). I think this should hold even where the prisoner would voluntarily agree otherwise just like how someone can't consensually enter into slavery. -- it isn't as if an incarcerated person can ever actually consent in any case: Consent under duress isn't consent.  Anything else has too much risk of bad incentives, and when it comes to locking people up-- that isn't a place where society should be tolerant of bad incentives.

[BADecker]

There should NEVER be any prison time given if the court hasn't found any harm to a human being, or damage to human-owned property. This should be made into a formal law of the courts, with evidence and proof of both, that there is injury in some way, and that the defendant did the injury.

[franky1]

There should NEVER be any prison time given if the court hasn't found any harm to a human being, or damage to human-owned property. This should be made into a formal law of the courts, with evidence and proof of both, that there is injury in some way, and that the defendant did the injury.

ok lets test out your freeman stance

imagine you had a family farm. the whole family owned it in equal shares
no one could decide what to do without majority vote for a certain plan.

but each day someone who didnt want to be part of the family and was treated as a stranger just drove into your farm at top speed and wheelspinned and drove out.
then the kept doing it 5 times a day, every day for a year

what would be the punishment
knowing there is a risk of an animal or family member getting hit someday, or even damage to the land

but with no one YET physically harmed no damage done.

what would be the punishment
or
just allowed free spirit to just wheelspin on someone elses property owned by multiple people and put them at risk

[eddie13]

The problem you have with that is that an unacceptably high number of people who end up incarcerated ... kinda suck.  Certainly not all, and I don't mean to suggest that they deserve to be in jail because of it. But a lot of people are addicted, stupid, or just dysfunctional in various difficult or impossible to cure ways that contribute to them making the sort of bad decisions which predictably end up with them in jail.

Darwinism.. And the world would be rid of them, and their possible "dysfunctional' genetics, for good..

protecting you from retaliation from the people you harmed

Many won't make it far enough to be protected when the free people have the right and mindset to protect themselves and solve their own problems without appealing to the authority of a higher power, if that is even an option..

[BADecker]

There should NEVER be any prison time given if the court hasn't found any harm to a human being, or damage to human-owned property. This should be made into a formal law of the courts, with evidence and proof of both, that there is injury in some way, and that the defendant did the injury.

ok lets test out your freeman stance

imagine you had a family farm. the whole family owned it in equal shares
no one could decide what to do without majority vote for a certain plan.

but each day someone who didnt want to be part of the family and was treated as a stranger just drove into your farm at top speed and wheelspinned and drove out.
then the kept doing it 5 times a day, every day for a year

what would be the punishment
knowing there is a risk of an animal or family member getting hit someday, or even damage to the land

but with no one YET physically harmed no damage done.

what would be the punishment
or
just allowed free spirit to just wheelspin on someone elses property owned by multiple people and put them at risk

For there to be no harm or damage done, the owners would be enjoying the spectacle. But at least they wouldn't care.

[BADecker]

The problem you have with that is that an unacceptably high number of people who end up incarcerated ... kinda suck.  Certainly not all, and I don't mean to suggest that they deserve to be in jail because of it. But a lot of people are addicted, stupid, or just dysfunctional in various difficult or impossible to cure ways that contribute to them making the sort of bad decisions which predictably end up with them in jail.

Darwinism.. And the world would be rid of them, and their possible "dysfunctional' genetics, for good..

Since it has been shown in the "Evolution is a hoax" thread, that Darwinism doesn't exist... LOL! You make a good joke.

protecting you from retaliation from the people you harmed

Many won't make it far enough to be protected when the free people have the right and mindset to protect themselves and solve their own problems without appealing to the authority of a higher power, if that is even an option..

If there wasn't any government, a thief would get caught and be forced to pay the price for his thievery... forced by the good people of the area.

Once the thieves saw this, they would realize that they would have to band together and form a thieves' government to survive.

Once the TG was active, the good people would realize they would have to form a good government to protect themselves from the TG.

Once the TG crooks realized that they were losing to the GG, they would become nice on the outside, so they could penetrate into the GG and be thieves from within.

This is what we have today... governments within governments within governments, on and on... Deep State.

The local jury is the authority - judge - in all things that affect the local area they are in. This is the way that the good people can rule, at the same time keeping the bad people from becoming country-wide dictatorial.

The only thing that is wrong is that the local people don't understand that they can pick up the local jury for anything, and change the country through jury nullification. So, they don't do anything, and nothing changes.

[gmaxwell]

Darwinism.. And the world would be rid of them, and their possible "dysfunctional' genetics, for good..

The linkage between generics and most forms of dysfunctional behaviour are very weak to statistically insignificant-- human genetics is already well optimized by evolution to produce consistently good outcomes. Worse, some of the strongest genetic connections that exist appear to be for traits that also produce HIGH ability in some people-- greater intelligence, creativity, etc. So if you were to try to breed out the dysfunctional people, you might also breed out the most capable.

Sometimes seemingly bad traits are preserved by evolution because they confer advantages in some situations, with some upbringings, by chance, or in combination with other genetic traits.

Plus what we consider 'dysfunction' is highly dependant on social context.  Galileo Galilei was considered a bad guy and a trouble maker by the powers that be in his time.

And every one of us has had ancestors who were lesser than ourselves.

Besides, human beings don't deserve to die just because they're losers even if you could somehow objectively determine that they were.

[franky1]

know that
gmaxwell prefers a judge and witness court room where witnesses follow judges rule and just agree or get removed from court
gmaxwell does not prefer juries that decide and set the precedence of rule where the judge simply gives options of different charges that could be set

so .. now i wonder
if gmaxwells society preference for having a central leader like himself deciding whats good or bad for bitcoin whiie suppressing opposition is due to his genetics or how he was brought up

personally i think its the megabucks income from the corporations he founded and got investment pumped into that swayed his morals.
it may have begun much earlier, via upbringing or a birth defect.. though i just think it was money related in recent years


evidence
gmaxwells hatred of opposing dev teams because HE feels HE would have to review their code and it would be too much work for HIM
gmaxwell doesnt want to have bitcoin reference client wrote in a new coding language that may benefit others because HE doesnt want to learn it

also to note
HIS evidence of trying to quote satoshi has been taken out of context, as satoshi was realising that people were starting to see him as a central point of decision making due to such questions. thus he left. to break that centralising aspect
 
it was not to be taken as context to prove a central point of reference of a single client and no opposition is the direction bitcoin should be taken

P.S
its my damn topic so dont go censorship crazy deleting this post, just because its not a thing you want to see being said

[BADecker]

know that
gmaxwell prefers a judge and witness court room where witnesses follow judges rule and just agree or get removed from court
gmaxwell does not prefer juries that decide and set the precedence of rule where the judge simply gives options of different charges that could be set

so .. now i wonder
if gmaxwells society preference for having a central leader like himself deciding whats good or bad for bitcoin whiie suppressing opposition is due to his genetics or how he was brought up

personally i think its the megabucks income from the corporations he founded and got investment pumped into that swayed his morals.
it may have begun much earlier, via upbringing or a birth defect.. though i just think it was money related in recent years


evidence
gmaxwells hatred of opposing dev teams because HE feels HE would have to review their code and it would be too much work for HIM
gmaxwell doesnt want to have bitcoin reference client wrote in a new coding language that may benefit others because HE doesnt want to learn it

also to note
HIS evidence of trying to quote satoshi has been taken out of context, as satoshi was realising that people were starting to see him as a central point of decision making due to such questions. thus he left. to break that centralising aspect
 
it was not to be taken as context to prove a central point of reference of a single client and no opposition is the direction bitcoin should be taken

P.S
its my damn topic so dont go censorship crazy deleting this post, just because its not a thing you want to see being said

Across the hall from notbatman, right?     

[franky1]

For there to be no harm or damage done, the owners would be enjoying the spectacle. But at least they wouldn't care.

i know you dont believe in the concept of tresspass.
as long as it means you dont get a speeding ticket for breaking the rules of the road because the same no harm or damage was done..
means the police officer can open your car door and search your car and ask you any questions and waste your time
because there was no harm or damage

so your other topic where no damage or harm was done, means you cant invoice a police officer. right?

also to note. anyone who knows badeckers address can happily walk into his house and stand there stalking his family, watching them. and just use the front entrance hallway and back door as a path for people to just walk along and not be told to get out

[BADecker]

For there to be no harm or damage done, the owners would be enjoying the spectacle. But at least they wouldn't care.

i know you dont believe in the concept of tresspass.
as long as it means you dont get a speeding ticket for breaking the rules of the road because the same no harm or damage was done..
means the police officer can open your car door and search your car and ask you any questions and waste your time
because there was no harm or damage

so your other topic where no damage or harm was done, means you cant invoice a police officer. right?

also to note. anyone who knows badeckers address can happily walk into his house and stand there stalking his family, watching them. and just use the front entrance hallway and back door as a path for people to just walk along and not be told to get out

How in the world dumb can you be? It isn't a trespass when someone is invited. It isn't a trespass when the owner doesn't care.

If the owner doesn't like it, then it's a trespass. If the owner doesn't do something about it but doesn't like it, it is still a trespass.

If the corporation tries to sue the man/woman doing the trespass, why does the corporation make up a fictional "person" to sue? If the man/woman who is doing the trespass treats the corporation's fictional person just as it is, a fictional person, he can sue the pants off everyone involved with the fictional person, because they are damaging him/her, but are not calling the man/woman to account. They are only calling some fictional person to account.

Let each man/woman member of the corporation sue for damages because it is hurting the pocketbook of each, or it is threatening each, or maybe it has damaged the person of one or two of them. If the men and women of the corporation bring claims against the man/woman doing the trespass, then the trespasser just might be convicted.

As it is, the idiot trespasser thinks he was called into account when the fictional person was called the trespasser. So, he accepts the position of being the fictional person. And that is the way he is found guilty. He isn't the person on the indictment. Why not? Because the indictment person doesn't bleed when the indictment is stabbed with a knife, but the man/woman does.

Wake up, and stop accepting that you are the fictional person on the indictment.